Heathrow: third runway 'best solution'

A new third runway at Heathrow would generate £100bn of benefits for the UK
economy and be “quicker and cheaper” than building a new hub to the east of
London, the airport has said.

Heathrow believes a third runway would be the best solution to solve Britain's aviation logjam. While it has outlined how its current site could be transformed into a four-runway hub, the airport stresses a fourth runway would not be needed until 2040.Photo: Getty Images

Heathrow is proposing to build a third runway either to the south-west or north-west of its current site at a cost of between £14bn and £18bn.

Colin Matthews, the airport’s boss, said it would require only £4bn to £6bn of public subsidy to upgrade surface transport links and insulate local homes, compared with an estimated £30bn bill for the taxpayer if London Mayor Boris Johnson gets his way and a new hub is built in the Thames Estuary.

Any decision on a fourth runway would not need to be taken until 2030 at the earliest, Mr Matthews said, as a third runway would allow Heathrow to accommodate 740,000 flights a year – 260,000 more than at present and more than in Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam.

Heathrow has submitted the three possible runway sites to the Airports Commission, chaired by Sir Howard Davies.

Mr Matthews refused to name his preferred option, but the north-west and south-west sites would have less of an impact on local communities than a third proposal to the north.

The south-west option would involve building a full-length 3,500 metre runway and other facilities over the village of Stanwell Moor in Surrey and would require the demolition of 850 homes. The airport insisted residents would be offered compensation “greater than the market value” of their properties.

The project would involve building the runway over two reservoirs – King George VI and Wraysbury – while a tunnel would be needed to re-route the M25.

Heathrow estimates the Stanwell Moor option would cost around £18bn and would not be ready until 2029, three years later than if a third runway were built over Harmondsworth in Middlesex, on the north-west corner of the current site.

Around 950 homes would need to be demolished if that option was chosen. Two listed buildings – a medieval Tithe Barn and Harmondsworth Church – would also be threatened, although Heathrow said it was looking at whether the properties could be saved. The cost of the north-west option is estimated at £17bn.

The third proposal, involving a shorter 2,800 metre runway over the village of Sipson, already largely owned by Heathrow, would be the “quickest and cheapest” option, costing around £14bn, the airport said. However, it would require the demolition of 2,700 homes and would leave more people exposed to noise.

Mr Matthews said no decision over where to build additional runways in the South East of England would be “easy”.

However, he is now more hopeful the airport can succeed with its expansion plans than when the Coalition ruled out a third runway, as the economic consequences of closing down the airport, plus the benefits of connecting it to more long-haul destinations, are “better understood”.

Closing down Heathrow to build a new hub airport in the Thames Estuary would result “in the biggest mass redundancy in British history”, putting some 114,000 people out of work overnight, said Mr Matthews.

“The fact that people now see there is a threat to Heathrow being there at all has made the [political] debate more constructive, more balanced than in the past," he said.

It is estimated that 70,000 to 150,000 local jobs would be generated from a third runway, which would allow Heathrow to offer 40 more direct connections to long-haul destinations than at present.

UK businesses trade 20 times more with emerging markets that have daily flights than those with infrequent or no direct service, according to research by Frontier Economics.

Heathrow sought to dispel concerns over the noise impact on local communities by claiming that by 2030, 10pc to 20pc fewer people will fall within Heathrow’s “noise footprint”.

The airport claims a third runway to the west of the current site would mean arriving aircraft would fly much higher over London, reducing the noise levels on the ground, although executives admitted there would be “winners and losers”, with less noise for residents of Richmond and Windsor and more for those living north of the airport towards West Drayton.

Some of the noise reduction would also come from greater use of quieter aircraft, such as the Airbus A380.

Heathrow’s plans were backed by business groups, including the Institute of Directors, but Mr Johnson said there were “absolutely no circumstances in which the expansion of Heathrow will be acceptable to London or of long-term benefit to the country”.

“There will be more pigs flying than aircraft if we are to believe the claim that three runways at Heathrow will make less noise than two,” Mr Johnson added.